The New Zealand Times. (PUBLISHED DAILY). FRIDAY, MAY 20, 1881.

New Zealand Times, Volume XXXVI, Issue 6273, 20 May 1881, Page 2

The New Zealand Times. (PUBLISHED DAILY). FRIDAY, MAY 20, 1881.

o>'E among the Bills introduced last session, but shelved for discussion at a more convenient season, was entitled “ An Act for the prevention of corrupt practices at elections of members of the House of Representatives.” Its measures were stringent and its penalties severe. Bribery as therein defined was made to comprise, as nearly as possible, every act and deed, direct or indirect, capable of being construed into a covert influence to induce votes, and the penalties of the Act were devised to fall not only on the tempter but the tempted, one of the clauses of the Act providing for punishment by fine or imprisonment of any person directly or indirectly receiving any consideration, either before, during, or after an election as an inducement to vote or to refrain from voting. In further pursuance of the desire to keep the ballot system absolutely pure and untampered with, the system of treating electors was declared unlawful; every candidate who either before, during, or after an election provided, or became accessory in providing, meat, drink, or entertainment for the purpose of corruptly influencing a voter, was made liable to fine, and the vote of any elector accepting such treating was to be considered void. Other methods of undue influence either of cajolement or threats were defined and provided against, and the Bill, as laid before the House, was well described as a thorough paced measure. In fact, the opinion was expressed that in its stringent conditions there was fear that, if it became law, it would defeat its own intent, and become in the hands of rejected candidates a tool for their revenge, a means of harassing those upon whom the choice of £the electors had fallen. It is possible that when again introduced the Corrupt Practices Prevention Bill will be modified to the extent of guarding against its becoming either an instrument of terror in the hands of unscrupulous parties or a deterrent to the free exercise of the franchise. The proposed measure was identical with one introduced in the previous session, modelled on an Act of the Imperial Parliament, and to some extent identical with the Corrupt Practices Prevention Act, ISOB, of New Zealand. In debate on the second reading it was considered questionable whether sufficient allowance had been made for the varying conditions of Home and colonial customs in restricting the hona Jide expenses of elections to an extremely narrow margin, and Dr. Wallis, the member for Auckland City West, placed a notice on the order paper —

That no Corrupt Practices Prevention Bill will be satisfactory to the House which sanctions payment for conveyance of voters to the poll, which does not give a definition of “ agent ” and “ agency ” in connection with

elections, and which does not recognise the distinction between the necessary expenses of elections and these other expenses, which, though not necessary, are at present legal, and which does not propose to enact,that the aforesaid necessary expenses must be paid through the Returning Officer.

The Bill, it may be remarked, made proviso for legalising the conveyance of voters for the purpose of polling. In the Yictorian Review for the current month is a well thought out article on the cost of elections and oblique bribery, in which numerous cogent reasons are advanced why the expenditure of large sums of money on elections should be disallowed. The writer maintains that, carried out as the State prescribes, an election has a simple dignity which money only spoils. He would have the candidate do nothing beyond verbally address the electors, and by means of a printed address place his opinions before those who are unable to be present. All money spent in influencing an election he deems money wasted and often resulting in positive mischief, because “lowering the self-respect of those who, if left to exercise the franchise according to good conscience and right reason, would have found in it an elevating influence and a sense of dignity in being entrusted with a great privilege by the State ” a responsibility which oblique bribery, in its manifold forms, undermines and renders altogether inoperative. Again, it is maintained that such expenditure places incompetent men, and sometimes grossly ignorant men, in positions for which they are not only unfit, but wherein, by their crass stupidity and want of culture, they become the tools of crafty politicians, while keeping out of the Legislature men of limited means, but to whom has come, “ according to that beautiful compensation which the tangled condition of mundane things everywhere exhibits, the quality of brain, the capacity of mind, the reach of intellect.” The writer asserts, what indeed is a selfevident fact corning within the ken of every man’s observation, that “for the demagogue who will pander to the basest passions of the mob, and for the vulgar and ignorant rich who will scatter them cash, constituencies may be found with comparative ease; but for the man of high resolve, lofty aims, and unflinching honesty of purpose and act, who will not stoop to meanness or trickery, who would not buy or bribe, or decoy a vote, a constituency, even in democratic Australia, is not so easily found.” It would be a too sweeping assertion to say that there is no chance of entering the Hew Zealand Parliament for the talented man, poor in worldly wealth, for, even in the present House of Representatives may be found many whose characters for honesty of purpose and good ability led to their election; but the question is, would the most severe law capable of being devised for the repression of undue influence at elections absolutely secure the election of talented men, and none besides ? The writer we have quoted from argues thus: —•

It would, of course, be exuberant credulity to suppose that the suppression of undue expenditure at elections would lead to the realisation of the Platonian Bepublic, in which “ the administration of the Government for peace and war should be committed to the highest, that is, the wisest, purest, be-t-bred order of men and women—whom Plato calls philosophers.” The practical and patriotic mind does not expect an utter purity in the exercise of the franchise ; nor does it undervalue the solid benefits to the State which the disallowance of money-spending must bring, because the chimeras of More in his “ Utopia” and Harrington in his “ Oceana ” are unattainable. It is sufficient to be assured that, by forbidding the expenditure of more money than is absolutely necessary to carry out an election, that is, that the electors may be thoroughly informed and placed in such a position that they can exercise the franchise intelligently and independently, a long advance will have been made to “ government by the highest, that is, thejwisest, purest, best.” It is not an ideal fancy that "sweeter (electoral) manners ” would have their fruition in “ purer laws.”

Among the members of the House of Representatives who spoke on the merits of the Bill under notice, there was a very evident consensus of opinion that the main difficulty lay in deciding what really comes within the definition of expenditure “absolutely necessary to carry out an election,” and the matter ended in it being still left a very open question. To this point, and definition of the terms “ agent” and “ agency,” debate will necessarily revert, whenever the Bill is re-introduced, and we hope, therefore, to see such emendation in its clauses as will tend to facilitate its becoming law.